Penn State administrators lied to grand jury, failed to report sexual assault

[Johnbuoy]

I'm curious if it really matters at this point what McQueary saw, reported or didn't report, what the administrators and others knew and did or didn't do etc., etc., etc. when it comes to reaching a verdict in this case. Seems to me it's more about the credibility of the accusers that's going to be the deciding factor. The rest is just background noise for now at least.

 

[SubbaBub]

I'm curious if it really matters at this point what McQueary saw, reported or didn't report, what the administrators and others knew and did or didn't do etc., etc., etc. when it comes to reaching a verdict in this case. Seems to me it's more about the credibility of the accusers that's going to be the deciding factor. The rest is just background noise for now at least.

Third party witnesses always help, his testimony probably precluded a defense where the first victim is attacked and the rest are bandwagoners looking for a payday. Not that that would have worked in this case, with so much else out there. Although part of me feels bad for McQueary. He's being judged on what he didn't do vs what he did. Look, he messed up huge, but if he just walked out and said nothing he might be personally better off. Not an incentive I'd like to see perpetuated like the Stop Snitchin' culture.

As a society we need to make it easier for witnesses to come forward, not harder.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

A former Penn St. assistant testified that he and other PSU assistants saw Sandusky bring young boys into the showers all the time. And that none of it seemed inappropriate at all.

I'm just disgusted with this whole case. An elderly man brings young boys into the locker room showers and nobody sees anything even remotely suspicious about that? Good Lord.

 

[Adios]

The testimony against Sandusky is nauseating.

 

[upstater]

I'm curious if it really matters at this point what McQueary saw, reported or didn't report, what the administrators and others knew and did or didn't do etc., etc., etc. when it comes to reaching a verdict in this case. Seems to me it's more about the credibility of the accusers that's going to be the deciding factor. The rest is just background noise for now at least.

Uh, Sandusky is going down. I don't see anyone defending Sandusky. The only conversation is whether the two administrators (and maybe the president) are going to be convicted.

 

[businesslawyer]

Uh, Sandusky is going down.

Now there is an unfortunate choice of words.

 

[SubbaBub]

Now there is an unfortunate choice of words.

Guilt has never really been in doubt., but an academic question for the lawyers, I heard on the radio that only 8 of the 10 victims in the indictment testified. Could the defense possibly wring a reasonable doubt verdict on the charges related to those two victims?

I thought it odd the state would bring the indictment without the victims willing to testify.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[upstater]

Guilt has never really been in doubt., but an academic question for the lawyers, I heard on the radio that only 8 of the 10 victims in the indictment testified. Could the defense possibly wring a reasonable doubt verdict on the charges related to those two victims?

I thought it odd the state would bring the indictment without the victims willing to testify.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

More than 2 didn't testify.
Victim #2 is the McQueary incident, and to this day, we don't know who that is.
One victim is the one witnessed by the janitor, and we also don't know who that is.
Victim #6, who is the kid from the 1999 case with Gricar, is actually still in contact with Sandusky--as hard as that is to believe given what Sandusky said to his Mom: "I wish I were dead."

 

[ZooCougar]

If Sandusky was a an English Lit. Prof. Then somehow I bet this wouldn't have dragged on this long.

The coaches didn't see anything wrong? How many red flags were there with this guy?